CJEU - C-179/11 Cimade, Groupe d’information et de soutien des immigres (GISTI) v Ministre de l’Interieur, de L’Outre-mer, des Collectivities territorials et de l’Immigration

ECRE is currently working on redeveloping the website. Visitors can still access the database and search for asylum-related judgments up until 2021.

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF version of SummaryPDF version of Summary
Country of Applicant: 
Unknown
Date of Decision: 
27-09-2012
Citation: 
C-179/11
Court Name: 
Fourth Chamber of the CJEU
Headnote: 

This case concerned the legality of a circular in French law which was challenged by two organisations on the basis that it was contrary to EU Law under the Reception Conditions Directive in so far as it excludes asylum seekers from entitlement to allowances if they are in the Dublin procedure in France. The CJEU held that the Reception Conditions Directive applies in such a scenario and therefore asylum seekers in the Dublin procedure should have access to the minimum reception conditions laid down in that Directive. This obligation ceases when the person is actually transferred to another Member State.

Facts: 

In 2010 CIMADE and GISTI applied to the Conseil d’Etat seeking to have the 3 November 2009 circular annulled on the basis that it was contrary to the Reception Conditions Directive as it excluded allowances (ATA) for asylum seekers in the Dublin procedure when France calls upon another Member State to take responsibility for their asylum claim. As the response to the submission required an interpretation of the relevant provisions of EU law, the Court referred the following questions to the CJEU:

(1) Does … Directive 2003/9 …guarantee the minimum reception conditions to which it refers to applicants in respect of whom a Member State in receipt of an application for asylum decides, under [Regulation No 343/2003], to refer a request to another Member State which it deems to have jurisdiction to examine that asylum application, throughout the duration of the procedure for taking charge of them or for taking them back by that other Member State?

(2)      If the answer to that question is in the affirmative:

(a)      Does the obligation, incumbent on the first Member State, to guarantee the minimum reception conditions cease at the moment of the acceptance decision by the State to which the referral was made, upon the actual taking charge or taking back of the asylum seeker, or at some other date?

(b)      Which Member State should thus assume the financial burden of providing the minimum reception conditions during that period?

Decision & Reasoning: 

As regards the first question the Court held that Directive 2003/9 applies to all third country nationals and stateless persons who apply for asylum as long as they are allowed to remain on the territory as asylum seekers. It noted that the definition of an applicant for asylum under the Reception Conditions Directive and the Dublin Regulation is in essence, identical. Article 13 of the Reception Conditions Directive provides that period during which material reception conditions must be granted to applicants begins when the asylum seeker applies for asylum. With reference to Article 4(1) of the Dublin Regulation the Court noted that the application for asylum is made before the process of determining the Member State responsible begins. The provisions of the Reception Conditions Directive must be interpreted in light of their general scheme and purpose and recital 5 which links it to the Charter of Fundamental Rights including Article 1 and 18 of the Charter in particular. The Court noted that in the Dublin procedure many months may pass pending transfer (Para 44) and in some cases the person may never be transferred. Therefore, in rejecting the States submissions it held that excluding such asylum seekers from accessing reception conditions cannot be justified by the length of time (Para 45). Accordingly the Court held that the minimum conditions under the Reception Conditions when a person is in a Dublin procedure when France is asking if another Member State can take charge or take back the person concerned.

As regards the second question the Court noted that an applicant retains his status as an asylum seekers within the meaning of the Directive as long as no final decision has been taken on his case. The mere request of the requesting Member State to another to take charge of an applicant does not bring the examination of asylum by the requesting Member State to an end. Only the actual transfer of the asylum seeker brings an end to the application for asylum by that State and its responsibility for granting the minimum reception conditions (Para 55). Further to Article 1 of the Charter – Human Dignity – must be respected and protected, the asylum seeker may not be deprived – even for a temporary period of time of the protection of the minimum standards in that Directive. Only in the cases under Article 16 of the Reception Conditions Directive can conditions be withdrawn or reduced when the asylum seekers does not comply with national reception rules. The financial burden of providing these minimum conditions is to be assumed by the Member State which is subject to that obligation. The Court acknowledges in this context the presence of Decision NO 573/2007 which established the European Refugee Fund which provides for financial assistance being offered to Member States with regard to reception conditions and asylum procedures.

Outcome: 

The Court ruled:  

1. Council Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003 laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum seekers in the Member States must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State in receipt of an application for asylum is obliged to grant the minimum conditions for reception of asylum seekers laid down in Directive 2003/9 even to an asylum seeker in respect of whom it decides, under Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national, to call upon another Member State, as the Member State responsible for examining his application for asylum, to take charge of or take back that applicant.

2. The obligation on a Member State in receipt of an application for asylum to grant the minimum reception conditions laid down in Directive 2003/9 to an asylum seeker in respect of whom it decides, under Regulation No 343/2003, to call upon another Member State, as the Member State responsible for examining his application for asylum, to take charge of or take back that applicant, ceases when that same applicant is actually transferred by the requesting Member State, and the financial burden of granting those minimum conditions is to be assumed by that requesting Member State, which is subject to that obligation.

Subsequent Proceedings : 

Thus far it appears that this judgment has not been fully complied with in practice by all Prefectures in France. In this regard see the French national report for the Dublin Transnational Network Project at www.dublin-project.eu.

Observations/Comments: 

Advocate General Sharpston’s Opinion is important to read in the context of this case. It provides a persuasive overview of the impact reception conditions may have on the assessment of a protection claim and in that regard cites UNHCR’s public statement for this case which is available here:

http://www.refworld.org/docid/4e37b5902.html

 

Press releases on this judgment:

http://www.eulaws.eu/?p=1727

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2012/sep/ecj-min-cond-prel.pdf

http://www.ecre.org/component/content/article/56-ecre-actions/317-dublin-ii-regulation-lives-on-hold.html

http://europeanlawblog.eu/?p=1271

Authentic Language: 
French
Country of preliminary reference: 
France
National / Other Legislative Provisions: 
TFEU - Art 267
Dubli Implementing Regulation 1560/2003 laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation 343/2003 Art 8
Decision No. 573/2007/EC on the European Refugee Fund for the period 2008-2013 - Art 2
Decision No. 573/2007/EC on the European Refugee Fund for the period 2008-2013 - Recital 13
Decision No. 573/2007/EC on the European Refugee Fund for the period 2008-2013 - Art 3(1)
France - Ceseda (Code of the Entry and Stay of Foreigners and Asylum Law) - Art L.723-1
France - Ceseda (Code of the Entry and Stay of Foreigners and Asylum Law) - Art L.741-4
France - Ceseda (Code of the Entry and Stay of Foreigners and Asylum Law) - Art L.742-1
France - Code de l’action sociale et des families (Code on Social Action and Families) - Art R.348-1
France - Code du travail (Code on Labour) - Art L.5423-8
France - 3 November 2009 Circular - L.5423-9
France - 3 November 2009 Circular - L. 5423-11